On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 3:26 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> ... I guess I'd prefer #2 to #2.5, #2.5 to #3, and #3 to #1. >> I really don't like #1 much - I think I'd almost rather do nothing. > > FWIW, that's about my evaluation of the alternatives as well. I fear > that #1 would get a lot of pushback. If we think that something like > "LATERAL ROWS FROM STRICT" is worth having on its own merits, then > doing #2.5 seems worthwhile to me, but otherwise I'm just as happy > with #2. David J. seems to feel that throwing an error (as in #2.5) > rather than silently behaving incompatibly (as in #2) is important, > but I'm not convinced. In a green field I think we'd prefer #2 over > #2.5, so I'd rather go that direction.
Same here. That behavior is actually potentially quite useful, right? Like, you might want to rely on the NULL-extension thing, if it were documented as behavior you can count on? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
